Editorial: Cuba and the candidates

Monday

Feb 25, 2008 at 12:01 AMFeb 25, 2008 at 8:37 PM

For all the heat their rivalry has generated, the policy differences between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been slight. But an important sliver of daylight appeared this month between their positions on Cuba.

The MetroWest Daily News

For all the heat their rivalry has generated, the policy differences between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been slight. But an important sliver of daylight appeared this month between their positions on Cuba.

In the wake of Fidel Castro's decision to resign, the media has focused again on a minor distinction aired early in the campaign, when Obama appeared more willing than Clinton to meet face to face with foreign dictators. That distinction remains, but a summit with Raul Castro is only important if it signifies a real shift in the policy that governed U.S. relations with Cuba for nearly 50 years.

With the bigger picture in mind, consider how Clinton responded to the Cuba question in last Thursday's debate: "I would not meet with him until there was evidence that change was happening, because I think it's important that they demonstrate clearly that they are committed to change the direction... releasing political prisoners, ending some of the oppressive practices on the press, opening up the economy."

That's a pretty good statement of U.S. policy since the Kennedy administration: Continue to isolate Cuba until it accedes to our demands to change its policies.

Here's how Obama responded: "Our policy has been a failure... During my entire lifetime... you essentially have seen a Cuba that has been isolated, but has not made progress when it comes to the issues of political rights and personal freedoms that are so important to the people of Cuba. So I think that we have to shift policy. I think our goal has to be ultimately normalization. But that's going to happen in steps. And the first step, as I said, is changing our rules with respect to remittances and with respect to travel."

That's pretty tepid first step compared to the changes in Cuba policy a lot of people are ready to embrace. We'd like to see the trade embargo and all travel restrictions lifted. The ban on agricultural exports has already been loosened by Congress.

There's a larger foreign policy question here. Over the last 40 years, America has seen repeatedly that engagement is far more effective at protecting U.S. interests and reforming distasteful regimes than isolation, which often makes them stronger. Obama seems to understand that, and is ready to launch a process of engagement with Cuba. Clinton is still choosing isolation, as did her husband, who made no serious effort to change the U.S./Cuba dynamic.

As for Republican nominee-in-waiting John McCain, there is no daylight between his current position and long-standing Cuba policy. McCain said this weekend that, even with Castro in the retirement home, he wouldn't change the trade embargo until Cuba holds U.S.-approved elections.

That's not a policy the U.S. applies to China, Russia, Saudi Arabia or a host of other foreign trading partners. U.S. Cuban policy is as much a Cold War relic as the Studebakers decorating Havana streets, and only one of the remaining presidential candidates recognizes it as such.